Richard Tafoya
Sep 24th, 2007, 04:46 PM
Think Progress:
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/09/24/bush-priorities/
The Democratic leadership in Congress is set to pass a host of domestic funding bills that would exceed Bush’s request by $22 billion (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/24/washington/24spend.html?ref=business). The extra funding would help go towards veterans health care, infrastructure improvements, education (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/17/AR2007091701569.html), and other domestic priorities.
Speaking to business leaders (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/09/20070924-1.html) at a White House event this morning, Bush railed against the relatively modest (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/24/washington/24spend.html?ref=business) increase in spending, arguing that $22 billion is “a lot of money”:
Some in Congress will tell you that $22 billion is not a lot of money. As business leaders, you know better. As a matter of fact, $22 billion is larger than the annual revenues of most Fortune 500 companies. The $22 billion is only for the first year. With every passing year the number gets bigger and bigger, and so over the next five years the increase in federal spending would add up to $205 billion.
Bush warned that spending increases, which could add up to over $200 billion over five years, would be “taking money out of the pocket” of Americans who need to “pay their mortgages or pay for their children going to college.” Unfortunately, Bush failed to appreciate the irony in his remarks.
While complaining of modest spending increases on much-needed domestic funding priorities, Bush is far less concerned about the impact of spending $200 billion (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-na-warcosts22sep22,0,234891.story?coll=la-home-center) in the next year alone on a disastrous war in Iraq:
President Bush plans to ask lawmakers next week to approve another massive spending measure — totaling nearly $200 billion — to fund the war through next year, Pentagon officials said.
It shouldn’t take a “CEO President (http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,331981,00.html)” to figure out that $200 billion is greater than $22 billion.
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/09/24/bush-priorities/
The Democratic leadership in Congress is set to pass a host of domestic funding bills that would exceed Bush’s request by $22 billion (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/24/washington/24spend.html?ref=business). The extra funding would help go towards veterans health care, infrastructure improvements, education (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/17/AR2007091701569.html), and other domestic priorities.
Speaking to business leaders (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/09/20070924-1.html) at a White House event this morning, Bush railed against the relatively modest (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/24/washington/24spend.html?ref=business) increase in spending, arguing that $22 billion is “a lot of money”:
Some in Congress will tell you that $22 billion is not a lot of money. As business leaders, you know better. As a matter of fact, $22 billion is larger than the annual revenues of most Fortune 500 companies. The $22 billion is only for the first year. With every passing year the number gets bigger and bigger, and so over the next five years the increase in federal spending would add up to $205 billion.
Bush warned that spending increases, which could add up to over $200 billion over five years, would be “taking money out of the pocket” of Americans who need to “pay their mortgages or pay for their children going to college.” Unfortunately, Bush failed to appreciate the irony in his remarks.
While complaining of modest spending increases on much-needed domestic funding priorities, Bush is far less concerned about the impact of spending $200 billion (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-na-warcosts22sep22,0,234891.story?coll=la-home-center) in the next year alone on a disastrous war in Iraq:
President Bush plans to ask lawmakers next week to approve another massive spending measure — totaling nearly $200 billion — to fund the war through next year, Pentagon officials said.
It shouldn’t take a “CEO President (http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,331981,00.html)” to figure out that $200 billion is greater than $22 billion.